"you can still have the case that the web 2.0 apps are much more interesting than the CS concepts on which they are based"
Which is more interesting, opera or football? Personally, I'm interested in opera -- and Computer Science -- but I'm willing to accept that most people find football (and web 2.0 applications) to be far more interesting.
But you thinking that Computer Science is boring doesn't imply that Computer Science is analogous to studying pens any more than me thinking that football is boring implies that football is analogous to the mating behaviour of male elk. In both cases there is similarity at first glance -- Computer Science courses tend to focus on very simple and well-understood algorithms (quicksort, binary search, minimal spanning tree, etc.), while to someone without understanding of tactics, football appears to be nothing more than a bunch of large males running at and into each other -- but if you take the time to understand either of these you'll see that the analogies fail quite quickly.
Which is more interesting, opera or football? Personally, I'm interested in opera -- and Computer Science -- but I'm willing to accept that most people find football (and web 2.0 applications) to be far more interesting.
But you thinking that Computer Science is boring doesn't imply that Computer Science is analogous to studying pens any more than me thinking that football is boring implies that football is analogous to the mating behaviour of male elk. In both cases there is similarity at first glance -- Computer Science courses tend to focus on very simple and well-understood algorithms (quicksort, binary search, minimal spanning tree, etc.), while to someone without understanding of tactics, football appears to be nothing more than a bunch of large males running at and into each other -- but if you take the time to understand either of these you'll see that the analogies fail quite quickly.